VIJAY NATHALAL GOHIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the Judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai, in Sessions Case No. 334 of 1991 on 19th December, 2002, the appellants have been convicted under Section 498A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. of 3 years and the fine of Rs. 1,000/each. In default they have to under go simple imprisonment for 1 month. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 are also held guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. Accused No. 3 was acquitted of charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Accused are also held guilty for the offence charged under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they have been sentenced to R.I. for 7 years. They are also fined Rs. 3,000/each and in default they have to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months.

(2.) The facts on which the charges under Sections 302, 498A and 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were framed, were that one Ramagauri was married to accused No. 1 in or about the year 1984. She was constantly illtreated by all the accused persons. She had two children. Accused No. 1 is the husband of the deceased. Accused No. 2 is the brother of accused No. 1 and accused No. 3 is the mother of accused Nos. 1 and 2. The prosecution contended that accused No. 1 shifted to Kumbharwada in a separate residence. But accused Nos. 2 and 3 used to go to that place also and quarrel with the deceased. Thereafter, accused No. 1 left his wife at the house of her parent at Rajkot. She lived there for some time then accused No. 1 brought her back and they started living in a room adjacent to the embroidery factory of the accused. On 21st May, 1990, accused No. 1 went to the Police Station concerned and reported the death of his wife by consumption of poison. Statement of brother of the deceased was recorded on the same day. Inquest panchanama was drawn. Accused No. 1 also gave a bottle of poison in the presence of panchas. Accused is alleged to have said that Ramagauri drank poison from the said bottle. Investigation started and FIR was registered. Autopsy was done. Evidence was completed and on completion of investigation the charge sheet was filed. On the basis of these allegations the charges were framed as mentioned hereinabove. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution examined 9 witnesses. There is no eye witness and the prosecution tried to establish the case on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that at the best it has been a case of suicide and neither it was a case of murder nor it was a case of dowry death.